In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants (1913)

Record Details:

Title:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants
Date:
1913
Publisher:
New York, Appeal Printing Co.
Volume:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants : record volume 4
Leaf #:
000179
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Early Cinema
Format:
Periodicals
Contributor:
The Museum of Modern Art Library, New York
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
These seven volumes contain the testimonies and supporting documents from the U.S. District Court's antitrust lawsuit against the Motion Picture Patents Company (MPPC). Formed in 1908, the MPPC (sometimes referred to asœ"the Edison Trust" or just "the Trust") sought to control the American film industry through pooling patents and demanding that producers and exhibitors acquire licenses to those patents. Independent producers and exhibitors, who refused to license the patents, argued that the MPPC was an unlawful monopoly. In 1912 and 1913, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania heard testimonies from both MPPC members, such as Siegmund Lubin, and "Independents" who later became Hollywood moguls, such as William Fox. Ultimately, in 1915, the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which found the MPPC in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and spelled the end for the already weakening MPPC. -- Eric Hoyt, 2012
Date Added:
September 21, 2023
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

J. A. Schuchert, Direct Examination. 2020 territory now? A. We have the Universal, which is doing business under the name of the Victor Film Exchange; the Mutual Film Corporation, and there is the Warner's Features, who have an office, and at least a half a dozen other feature film exchanges doing business in our territory. Q. When you said a moment ago that you might take the service requested away from another exhibitor, what did you mean by that? A. I would try and negotiate with him to see — if he was getting, well, we said there two-day old films, I might induce him to use a three-day old film by giving him either credit or some other make of film which he might prefer, or certain changes in his program, in that way opening up his film of the two days to get another customer. Q. In other words, you would try to make an adjustment or an amicable arrangement? A. Positively. We do not deliberately take the film away from him without consulting him. Q. Did it ever come to your knowledge that one exchange would threaten one of your customers, an exhibitor, that if he did not take service from him, he would supply such a character of service as to put that exhibitor out of business, or very materially affect his business? ing? Mr. Grosvenor: Of what period are you speakMr. Caldwell : Prior to July, 1910. The Witness: Why, I did hear such remarks. I don't know how much weight there was to them. I have heard such talk as that, but I cannot recall whether those words were of any account. By Mr. Caldwell: Q. To what extent is your branch of the General Film Company in competition with exchanges handling the Universal and the Mutual programs? A. We are in competition daily. Where we are using about forty-seven reels a week, each one of those offices, both Universal and Mutual, use about twenty-four each per week. I am conversant wTith the territory, and I know the two of them combined are supplying a greater number of their customers 4